Author of Rethinking Diabetes, The Case Against Sugar, Why We Get Fat and Good Calories, Bad Calories
I’ve wanted to write for years about the seemingly unseemly tendency in the nutrition world to speculate about the dietary lessons we can learn when a prominent promoter of a particular dietary philosophy passes away. It’s not inappropriate to ask these questions. But there are limits to what we can ever know. The recent passing of the basketball great Bill Walton gave me the motivation to address this in my latest post on Unsettled Science.
My latest post on Unsettled Science: Johann Hari’s new book, Magic Pill, does a good job on the benefits and risks of taking a drug like Ozempic.
It goes off the rails when he gets around to discussing the science of obesity.
Consider this the Satiety Problem Problem. Another learning experience (we didn’t need) on how science and science journalism fail us when it comes to obesity.
In the years after I published Good Calories, Bad Calories (2007), I would frequently get emails from readers saying, in effect, “now that you’ve taken on nutrition science, would you look into climate change?”
I never did and, I would reply, I almost assuredly never would. That’s still true, but this week I took the opportunity to point out a phenomenon the two research disciplines share and it’s a worrisome one.
The scientist activist problem
